click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130117
20130125
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the folks that were elected with us, the senators that have arrived in the last five or ten years. i think we have the ability to respond in a big, bold way to the crises that face us. and i know senator merkley, you came here a young man with senator hatfield i believe and you saw a different senate. maybe you could talk about that and we don't want to stay, i know we're going to a caucus and we have our generous chair here, so we don't want to keep her up there too long, our presiding officer. anyway, senator merkley, i yield. mr. merkley: i think my colleague from new mexico is absolutely right in pointing out there were periods when the senate really worked to address the big issues facing america. and it wawnltd that there weren't -- wasn't that there weren't profound differences. there were fierce differences, emotional differences, deep differences but folks came to this floor, they conversed, they laid out their arguments and ultimately they made decisions about which way to go. and they didn't bring the attitude let's just paralyze this chamber from doing doing nothing. had they d
approval rating in a while. this is the natural ebb and flow. it usually builds up after winning re-election. there are a lot of things in the agenda space. you pay off a limited budget right? you can purchase things with that political capital. the horror of newtown is such that it has forced this issue to the foreti particularly in the wake of aurora. if you were designing the agenda in the absence of that and obviously you can't do that is this something that you want to see prioritized or are there other things you would put ahead of it? >> no. this is something that needs to be prioritized. of course the whole issue of sequestration and raising the debt ceiling limit, getting the budget under control, are probably our highest priority at this point in time. we should be meeting four and five days a week in committee doing the job that we were elected to do and the republican leadership has not set a schedule that we can do that. the whole gun control issue has been on the front pages now for decades and the democrats, republicans, none of us have really done anything about it. so i thin
and a number of senators as well. and to ask him directly about the elections and ask him about my second question. but i wanted to get your sense of where you see those lexes going. what efforts you can undertake to make sure that they are free and fair because they've been, i think, central to the next chapter in this transition. i just wanted to comment on that. the second question as it relates to afghanistan is one that senator boxer raised and her work on this has been exemplary, on women and girls and in particular, i have a -- an amendment that we got through the national defense authorization act which would require both state and defense to file a report on the efforts to promote the security of afghan women and girls just by way of itemization monitoring and responding to changes in women's security that will be part of the report. secondly, improving gender sensitivity and responsiveness among the afghan security forces and increasing the recruitment and retention of women in the afghan security forces. so both with regard to the election and women and girls. >> senator with r
's liberal agenda on gun control. jon: -pt president doesn't have to run for office again. he's won re-election. he has four years to get done what he wants to do. we heard in the inaugural address that he seems to have moved -- well he seems to be pushing some more liberal positions than he espoused earlier. you have senators like tim johnson of south dakota. mark udall of colorado, maryland drew of lashes all of the democratic senators, all of them from states that do not favor increasing restrictions on john sales. >> then also you have members of congress that are up for re-election, and some of these are blue dog democrats. when people go to the polls if they do not vote their conscience and vote for their constituents, people at the polls are going to give them pain of defeat. when it comes to god in certain states and when it comes to guns people do not go against the grain of what they believe in. so i think that the dscc and harry reid should stand firm and not follow the president's liberal agenda on this. but you do have a strong gun lobby in washington d.c., those mountainses for gu
purposes. >> i just want to say the whole business about people use today is mitt romney lost the election with the whole horse and bayonet. i wish would stay away from that because the president said were not using bayonets anymore. so it's a different weaponry, but the other thing missing here i think when i talk about overreach, the e-mail you read in general kristol's observation is people say, why do you need an assault weapon? nobody needs an assault weapon, but that's not the issue. by somebody in this country need to have a trial by jury? by somebody who's robbed a bank need to have the fourth amendment having a search warrant before you issue? nobody needs those things. the issue as they were enshrined in the constitution. so you have to make sure you work with what the supreme court has said. the right to bear arms is an individual right. the first of all affect the value can you can have reasonable restrictions, so the path forward for responsible legislators is to find out what the reasonable restrictions are that save lives. i think the taking of when human life is a horrible
than we should have and it's the next election cycle or partisanship for the public interest has already taken and economic toll on what could have been because the bottom line is not only do we have to put these kind of savings policies in place, we have to be thoughtful about how we do them and when we are talking about spending, we have to think about how we not only bring spending down, but we readjust and prioritize and the budget completely emphasizes consumption instead of assumption. we need to turn that on its head and when we talk about revenue there is no question that was an aging population you have to bring in more revenue than you have in the past but if you do that in the same outdated anti-competitive tax system if you use this opportunity and you are bold about tax reform that we need on the individual and corporate side to open up our economic system you can do this in a way that is good for the economy so we have hard choices to make and we should give ourselves the time to put the policies in place that deal with the deficit and also have a vision and the sta
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)